cops are acting for the state, afaik you're not acting in a capacity to enforce the states legal rights... torts?

I imagine it would matter is it was a city cop, county sheriff, or a state trooper, what corp you would add to the counterclaim.

The police start the complaint via laws from the state/province. Even some domestic disputes, the police "charge" a person with assault even though the persons involved did not wish to press charges. Police start the complaint for revenues for the state/province.

So Police start the complaint but where is the account created? Correct me if I'm wrong to do so but, I picture a company (Police) and it's accounting department. A cop goes to the accounting department and they create an account for "PERSON" and attach the debt to it... Am I right to picture it as such?

No, the complaint would get filed with the court. After the cop is done with you, you don't really hear from him again...

Sub-contractors I guess...

cop submits suspected tort. crown/state prosecutor raises the case, court accept their assurances.

I've been in court a couple of times and the case was EAMONN O BRIEN V JOHN SMITH (Guard) Is John Smith appearing in right of the state as a sub-contractor?

in my case the prosecution service were absent, the cop who arrested me became prosecution & witness, cps obviously withdrew for liability purposes.

I'll let the cogs turn for a bit now... Cheers folks...

Suil, what is cps?

criminal prosecution service here dude

Gotcha. I think that means Child Protection Services here, thats why I asked

almost a private prosecution after they didn't go ahead with the jurisdiction hearing & that judge recuse'd himself

ONLY a PERSON can be charged for breaking a red light, and this PERSON is presumed an EMPLOYEE of this city where it happens, so the EMPLOYEE (Person) have made an INFRACTION.....so the employee has to be PUNISHED for it....so they create an account for this EMPLOYEE (person) and collect the EMPLOYEE. If the employee plea guilty or not-guilty, the employee is confirming his employee status with this city. Does that makes sense ? :/ I am going through all this with the city of Montreal....I am almost there, I have sent a letter explaining all this to them, and I rebutt the fact that PIERRE DAOUST can be one of their EMPLOYEE.... I have returned them the ticket saying NO CONTRACT on it......5 months later, they sent me a guilty plea, with a judgement....I sent them a letter asking WHO entered a plea on the person, and WHO decided to judge the person without inviting the person......they've sent me back a letter asking to call them :D I called them and recorded the call, the lady told me that a computer system entered a guilty plea, and a computer system entered a judgement :D

So I've sent back a letter telling them that the only way the person can be found guilty and judged by a computer system, is if YOU THINK, that the person is one of your employee......or you are completly ILLEGAL in your stuf.... I am waiting for an answer to this one :D

party to a contractual obligation.